The Leading Facts of English History Part 69

In future the King, unless he violated the law, had to look to the Commons--that is, to the direct representation of the ma.s.s of the people--for his chief supplies. This made the will of the Commons more powerful than it had ever been.

14. Religious Legislation; Emanc.i.p.ation of the Villeins; Disfranchis.e.m.e.nt of County Electors.

The Parliament of Merton had already (1236) refused to introduce the canon or ecclesiatical law (S265). In the next century two very important statutes relating to the Church were enacted,--that of Provisors (1350)[4] and the Great Act of Praemunire, 1393,[1]--limiting the power of the Pope over the English Church. On the other hand, the rise of the Lollards had caused a statute to be pa.s.sed (1401) against heretics, and under it the first martyr had been burned in England. During this period the villeins had risen in insurrection (1381) (SS250-252), and were gradually gaining their liberty. Thus a very large body of people who had been practically excluded from political rights now began to slowly acquire them.[2]

But, on the other hand, a statute was enacted (1430) which prohibited all persons having an income of less than forty s.h.i.+llings a year--or what would be equal to forty pounds at the present value of money-- from voting for knights of the s.h.i.+re (S297). The consequence was that the poorer and humbler cla.s.ses in the country were no longer directly represented in the House of Commons.

[4] Provisors: this was a law forbidding the Pope to provide any person (by antic.i.p.ation) with a position in the English Church until the death of the inc.u.mbent.

[1] Praemunire: see Const.i.tutional Doc.u.ments, p. x.x.xii. Neither the law of Provisors nor of Praemunire was strictly enforced until Henry VIII's reign.

[2] Villeins appear, however, to have had the right of voting for knights of the s.h.i.+re until the statute of 1430 difranchised them.

15. Wars of the Roses; Decline of Parliament; Partial Revival of its Power under Elizabeth.

The Civil Wars of the Roses (1455-1485) gave a decided check to the further development of parliamentary power. Many n.o.ble families were ruined by the protracted struggle, and the new n.o.bles created by the King were pledged to uphold the interests of the Crown. Furthemore, numerous towns absorbed in their own local affairs ceased to elect members to the Commons. Thus, with a House of Lords on the side of royal authority, and with a House of Commons diminished in numbers and in influence, the decline of the independent att.i.tude of Parliament was inevitable.

The result of these changes was very marked. From the reign of Henry VI to that of Elizabeth, a period of nearly a hundred and forty years, "the voice of Parliament was rarely heard." The Tudors practically set up a new or "personal monarchy," in which their will rose above both Parliament and the const.i.tution;[3] and Henry VII, instead of asking the Commons for money, extorted it by fines enforcedby his Court of Star Chamber, or compelled his wealthy subjects to grant it to him in "benevolences" (S330)--those "loving contributions," as the King called them, "lovingly advanced"!

[3] Theoretically Henry VII's power was restrained by certain checks (see S328, note 1), and even Henry VIII generally ruled according to the letter of the law, however much he may have violated its spirit.

It is noticable, too, that it was under Henry VIII (1541) that Parliament first formally claimed freedom of speech as one of its "undoubted privieges."

During this period England laid claim to a new continent, and Henry VIII, repudiating the authority of the Pope, declared himself the "supreme head" (1535) of the English Catholic Church. In the next reign (Edward VI) the Catholic wors.h.i.+p, which had existed in England for nearly a thousand years, was abolished (1540), and the Protestant faith became henceforth--except during Mary's short reign--the established religion of the kingdom. It was enforced by two Acts of Uniformity (1549, 1552). One effect of the overthrow of Catholicism was to change the character of the House of Lords, by reducing the number of spiritual lords from a majority to a minority, as they have ever since remained (S406, note 2).

At the beginning of Elizabeth's reign the Second Act of Supremacy (1559) shut out all Catholics from the House of Commons (S382), Protestantism was fully and finally established as the state religion,[1] embodied in the creed known as the Thirty-Nine Articles (1563); and by the Third Act of Uniformity (1559) very severe measures were taken against all--whether Catholics or Puritans--who refused to conform to the Episcopal mode of wors.h.i.+p. The High Commission Court was organized (1583) to try and to to punish heretics--whether Catholics or Puritans. The great number of paupers caused by the destruction of the monasteries under Henry VIII and the gradual decay of relations of feudal service caused the pa.s.sage of the first Poor Law (1601) (S403), and so brought the Government face to face with a problem which has never yet been satisfactorily settled; namely, what to do with habitual paupers and tramps.

[1] By the Third Act of Uniformity and the establishment of the High Commission Court (S382). The First and Second Acts of Uniformity were enacted under Edward VI (S362).

The closing part of Elizabeth's reign marks the revival of parliamentary power. The House of Commons now had many Puritan members, and they did not hesitate to a.s.sert their right to advise the Queen on all questions of national importance. Elizabeth sharply rebuked them for presuming to meddle with questions of religion, or for urging her either to take a husband or to name a successor to the throne; but even she did not venture to run directly counter to the will of the people. When the Commons demanded (1601) that she should put a stop to the pernicious practice of granting trading monopolies (S388) to her favorites, she was obliged to yield her a.s.sent.

16. James I; the Divine Right of Kings; Struggle with Parliament.

James began his reign by declaring that kings rule not by the will of the people, but by "divine right." "G.o.d makes the King," said he, "and the King makes the law" (S419). For this reason he demanded that his proclamations should have all the force of acts of Parliament.

Furthermore, since he appointed the judges, he could generally get their decisions to support him; thus he made even the courts of justice serve as instruments of his will. In his arrogance he declared that neither Parliament nor the people had any right to discuss matters of state, whether foreign or domestic, since he was resolved to reserve such questions for the royal intellect to deal with. By his religious intolerance he maddened both Puritans and Catholics, and the Pilgrim Fathers fled from England to escape his tyranny.

But there was a limit set to his overbearing conceit. When he dictated to the Commons (1604) what persons should sit in that body, they indignantly refused to submit to any interference on his part, and their refusal was so emphatic that James never brought the matter up again.

The King, however, was so determined to shut out members whom he did not like that he attempted to gain his ends by having such persons seized on charges of debt and thrown into prison. The Commons, on the other hand, not only insisted that their ancient privilege of exemption from arrest in such cases should be respected, but they pa.s.sed a special law (1604) to clinch the privilege.

Ten years later (1614) James, pressed for money, called a Parliament to get supplies. He had taken precautions to get a majority of members elected who would, he hoped, vote for him what he wanted. But to his dismay the Commons declined to grant him a penny unless he would promise to cease imposing illegal duties on merchandise. The King angrily refused and dissolved the so-called "Addled Parliament."[1]

[1] This Parliament was nicknamed the "Addled Parliament," because it did not enact a single law, though it most effectually "addled" the King's plans (S424).

Finally, in order to show James that it would not be trifled with, a later Parliament (1621) revived the right of impeachment, which had not been resorted to since 1450.[2] The Commons now charged Lord Chancellor Bacon, judge of the High Court of Chancery, and "keeper of the King's conscience," with accepting bribes. Bacon held the highest office in the gift of the Crown, and the real object of the impeachment was to strike the King through the person of his chief official and supporter. Bacon confessed his crime, saying, "I was the justest judge that was in England these fifty years, but it was the justest censure in Parliament that was these two hundred years."

[2] See S13 of this Summary

James tried his best to save his servile favorite, but it was useless, and Bacon was convicted, disgraced, and partially punished (S425).

The Commons of the same Parliament pet.i.tioned the King against the alleged growth of the Catholic religion in the knigdom, and especially against the proposed marriage of the Prince of Wales to a Spanish Catholic princess. James ordered the Commons to let mysteries of the state alone. They claimed liberty of speech. The King a.s.serted that they had no liberties except such as the royal power saw fit to grant. Then the Commons drew up their famous Protest, in which they declared that their liberties were not derived from the King, but were "the ancient and undoubted birthright and inheritance of the people of England." In his rage James ordered the journal of the Commons to be brought to him, tore out the Protest with his own hand, and sent five of the members of the House to prison (S419). This rash act made the Commons more determined than ever not to yield to arbitrary power.

James died three years later, leaving his unfortunate son Charles to settle the angry controversy he had raised. Macaulay remarks that James seems to have been sent to hasten the coming of the Civil War.

17. Charles I; Forced Loans; the Pet.i.tion of Right.

Charles I came to the throne full of his father's lofty ideas of the Divine Right of Kings to govern as they pleased. In private life he was conscientious, but in his public policy he was a man "of dark and crooked ways."

He had married a French Catholic princess, and the Puritans, who were now very strong in the House of Commons, suspected that the King secretly sympathized with the Queen's religion. This was not the case; for Charles, after his peculiar fas.h.i.+on, was a sincere Protestant, though he favored the introduction into the English Church of some of the ceremonies peculiar to Catholic wors.h.i.+p.

The Commons showed their distrust of the King by voting him the tax of tonnage and poundage (certain duties levied on wine and merchandise), for a single year only, instead of for life, as had been their custom. The Lords refused to a.s.sent to such a limited grant,[1] and Charles deliberately collected the tax without the authority of Parliament. Failing, however, to get a sufficient supply in that way, the King forced men of property to grant him "benevolences," and to loan him large sums of money with no hope of its return. Those who dared to refuse were thrown into prison on some pretended charge, or had squads of brutal soldiers quartered in their houses.

[1] See Taswell-Langmead (revised edition), p. 557, note.

When even these measures failed to supply his wants, Charles was forced to summon a Parliament, and ask for help. Instead of granting it, the Commons drew up the Pet.i.tion of Right[2] of 1628, as an indignant remonstrance, and as a safeguard against further acts of tyranny. This Pet.i.tion has been called the "Second Great Charter of the Liberties of England." It declared: (1) That no one should be compelled to pay any tax or to supply the King with money, except by order of act of Parliament. (2) That neither soldiers nor sailors should be quartered in private houses.[3] (3) That no one should be imprisoned or punished contrary to law. Charles was forced by his need of money to a.s.sent to this Pet.i.tion, which thus became a most important part of the English const.i.tution. But the King did not keep his word. When Parliament next met (1629), it refused to grant money unless Charles would renew his pledge not to violate the law. The King made some concessions, but finally resolved to adjourn Parliament. Several members of the Commons held the Speaker in the chair by force,--thus preventing the adjournment of the House,--until resolutions offered by Sir John Eliot were pa.s.sed (S434). These resolutions were aimed directly at the King. They declared: (1) that he is a traitor who attempts any change in the established religion of the kingdom;[4] (2) who levies any tax not voted by Parliament; (3) or who voluntarily pays such a tax. Parliament then adjourned.

[2] Pet.i.tion of Right: see S432, and Const.i.tutional Doc.u.ments, p.x.x.x.

[3] The King was also deprived of the power to press citizens into the army and navy.

[4] The Puritans had come to believe that the King wished to restore the Catholic religion as the Established Church of England, but in this idea they were mistaken.

18. "Thorough"; s.h.i.+p Money; the "Short Parliament."

The King swore that "the vipers" who opposed him should have their reward. Eliot was thrown into prison and kept there till he died.

Charles made up his mind that, with the help of Archbishop Laud in Church matters, and of Lord Strafford in affairs of state, he would rule without Parliaments. Strafford urged the King to adopt the policy of "Thorough"[1] (S435); in other words, to follow the bent of his own will without consulting the will of the nation. This, of course, practically meant the overthrow of parliamentary and const.i.tutional government. Charles heartily approved of this plan for setting up what he called a "beneficent despotism" based on "Divine Right."

[1] "Thorough": Strafford wrote to Laud, "You may govern as you please....I am confident that the King is able to carry any just and honorable action thorough [i.e. through or against] all imaginable opposition." Both Strafford and Laud used the word "thorough," in this sense to designate their tyrannical policy.

The King now resorted to various unconst.i.tutional means to obtain supplies. The last device he hit upon was that of raising s.h.i.+p money. To do this, he levied a tax on all the counties of England,-- inland as well as seaboard,--on the pretext that he purposed building a neavy for the defense of the kingdom. John Hampden refused to pay the tax, but Charles's servile judges decided against him, when the case was brought into court (S436).

Charles ruled without a Parliament for eleven years. He might, perhaps, have gone on in this way for as many more, had he not provoked the Scots to rebel by attempting to force a modified form of the English Prayer Book on the Church of that country (S438). The necessities of the war with the Scots compelled the King to call a Parliament. It declined to grant the King money to carry on the war unless he would give some satisfactory guarantee of governing according to the will of the people. Charles refused to do this, and after a three weeks' session he dissolved what was known as the "Short Parliament."

19. The "Long Parliament"; the Civil War.

But the war gave Charles no choice, and before the year was out he was obliged to call the famous "Long Parliament" of 1640.[2] That body met with the firm determination to restore the liberties of Englishmen or to perish in the attempt. (1) It impeached Strafford and Laud, and sent them to the scaffold as traitors.[3] (2) It swept away those instruments of royal oppression, the Court of Star Chamber and the High Commission Court (SS330, 382). (3) It expelled the bishops from the House of Lords. (4) It pa.s.sed the Triennial Bill, compelling the King to summon a Parliament at least once in three years.[4] (5) It also pa.s.sed a law declaring that the King could not suspend or dissolve Parliament without its consent. (6) Last of all, the Commons drew up the Grand Remonstrance (S439), enunciating at great length the grievances of the last sixteen years, and vehemently appealing to the people to support them in their attempts at reform. The Remonstrance was printed and distributed throughout England.[1]

[2] The "Long Parliament": it sat from 1640 to 1653, and was not finally dissolved until 1660.

[3] Charles a.s.sured Strafford that Parliament should not touch "a hair of his head"; but to save himself the King signed the Bill of Attainder (see p.x.x.xii), which sent his ablest and most faithful servant to the block. Well might Strafford exclaim, "Put not your trust in princes."

[4] The Triennial Act was repealed in 1664 and reenacted in 1694. In 1716 the Septennial Act increased the limit of three years to seven.

This act is still in force.

[1] The press soon became, for the first time, a most active agent of political agitation, both for and against the King (S443).

About a month later (1642) the King, at the head of an armed force, undertook to seize Hampden, Pym, and three other of the most active members of the Commons on a charge of treason (S449). The attempt failed. Soon afterwards the Commons pa.s.sed the Militia Bill, and thus took the command of the national militia and of the chief fortresses of the realm, "to hold," as they said, "for King and Parliament." The act was unconst.i.tutional; but, after the attempted seizure of the five members, the Commons felt certain that if they left the command of the militia in the King's hands, they would simply sign their own death warrant.

In resentment of this action, Charles now (1642) began the great Civil War. It resulted in the execution of the King, and in the temporary overthrow of the monarchy, the House of Lords, and the Established Episcopal Church (SS450, 451). In place of the monarchy, the party in power set up a short-lived Puritan Republic. This was followed by the Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell (which claimed to be republican in spirit) and by that of his son Richard (SS455, 463).

20. Charles II; Abolition of Feudal Tenure; Establishment of a Standing Army.

In 1660 the people, weary of the Protectorate form of government, welcomed the return of Charles II. His coming marks the restoration of the monarchy, of the House of Lords, and of the National Episcopal Church.

A great change was now effected in the source of the King's revenue.

Hitherto it had sprung largely from feudal dues. These had long been difficult to collect, because the Feudal System had practically died out. The feudal land tenure with its dues was now abolished,--a reform, says Blackstone, greater even than that of Magna Carta,--and in their place a tax was levied for a fixed sum (S482). This tax should in justice have fallen on the landowners, who profited by the change; but they managed to evade it in great measure, and by getting it levied on beer and some other liquors, they forced the working cla.s.ses to shoulder the chief part of the burden, which they carried until very recently.[2]

[2] See S34 of this Summary.